Tuesday, June 24, 2014

Adele Reinhartz writes a piece on "The Vanishing Jews of Antiquity" in Marginalia for the LA Times Book Review (6/24).

She raises questions about the way in which many scholars now
render IOUDAIOI as "Judeans." Where formerly scholars including those
who translated the Bible once rendered ioudaios/ioudaioi as “Jew/Jews,” since 2007, now
these terms are rendered “Judaean/Judaeans.” The argument of scholars like
Steve Mason is that the category “Judaean” is a more precise and ethical
because in the first place it corresponds to the complex meaning of ioudaios in ancient sources and second,
that is counteracts the anti-Semitism historically associated with some of
these Greek texts, particularly the New Testament.

The latter is forcefully argued by Danker in the entry for Ioudaios in A Greek-English Lexicon
of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (BDAG) third
edition (478a-b):

“Incalculable harm has been caused by simply glossing ioudaios with “Jew,” for many readers or auditors of Bible
translations do not practice the historical judgement necessary to distinguish
between circumstances and events of ancient time and contemporary ethnic
religious social realities, with the result that anti-Judaism in the modern
sense of the term is needlessly fostered through biblical texts.”

Prof Reinhardt’s then focuses on the rendering of the term
in the gospel of John. She says,
“despite some neutral or even positive occurrences, the Ioudaioi figure most prominently as the opponents of Jesus, who’s
lying and murderous conspiracy to have crucified demonstrates that they are
children of the devil (John 8:44).” And
she notes that “the potent association between these figures and the devil
remains deeply embedded in anti-Semitic discourse to this day.”

Rendering Ioudaioi by “Judeans” is a way of making adherents
to the laws of Moses in the Hellenistic world e.g. Jews in the gospel of John
invisible. And it exonerates the author of the gospel of John from any role in
the history of anti-Judaism and anti-Semitism.

She argues that “the term Jew is more precise because it
signals the complex type of identity that the ancient sources associate with
the Greek term and also because it allows Judaean to retain its primary meaning
as a geographical designation useful when discussing the inhabitants or
topography of Judaea.” That term is
more ethical “because it acknowledges the Jewish connection to this period of
history and these ancient texts and because it opens up the necessity of
confronting the role of the New Testament in the history of anti-Semiticism.”

Anthony Grafton, Princeton University. In this six-part lecture series entitled Past Belief: Visions of Early Christianity in Renaissance and Reformation Europe, Anthony Grafton focuses on the efforts of artists and scholars to recreate the early history of Christianity in a period of crisis in the church from the 15th to the 17th century. In this sixth lecture, entitled “Constantine and Conversion: The Roles of the First Christian Emperor,” originally delivered at the National Gallery of Art on May 11, 2014, Professor Grafton argues that in their retelling of the dramatic and exemplary life of Constantine, scholars and artists forged new forensic, historical, and multidisciplinary approaches. They used philological and antiquarian evidence to unpack a layered and incoherent body of evidence that exposed the apocryphal legends of what has been called an “inherited conglomerate.” Protestant and Catholic writers concurred in their assessment that Constantine’s reign marked a radical transformation of art and religion and was thus a historical moment of great consequence—yet one or two began to see Constantine in less dramatic terms, as the human, political figure that he was. The erudition and imagination of these scholars and artists in the early modern period produced sophisticated and acute views of the early church, from which we can still profit today.